The Department of Justice has announced that the 3M Company (3M), headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota, has agreed to pay $9.1 million to resolve allegations that it knowingly sold the dual-ended Combat Arms Earplugs, Version 2 (CAEv2) to the United States military without disclosing defects that hampered the effectiveness of the hearing protection device.

“The Department of Justice is committed to protecting the men and women serving in the United States military from defective products and fraudulent conduct,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler of the Department’s Civil Division. “Government contractors who seek to profit at the expense of our military will face appropriate consequences.”

“Through rigorous enforcement of the False Claims Act, we protect taxpayer dollars from waste, fraud, and abuse,” said U. S. Attorney Sherri Lydon for the District of South Carolina. “And in this case in particular, we are proud to defend the integrity of our military programs and ensure that our men and women in uniform are adequately protected as they serve our country.”

“Today’s settlement will ensure that those who do business with the government know that their actions will not go unnoticed,” said Frank Robey, director of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command’s Major Procurement Fraud Unit. “Properly made safety equipment, for use by our Soldiers, is vital to our military’s readiness. Our agents will respond robustly to protect the safety of our military.”

“This settlement demonstrates the commitment of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and our law enforcement partners to hold companies accountable for supplying substandard products, in particular products that could directly impact our service members’ health and welfare. DCIS protects the integrity of Defense Department programs by rooting out fraud, waste, and abuse that negatively affect the wellbeing of our troops,” said Special Agent in Charge Robert E. Craig, Jr., DCIS Mid-Atlantic Field Office.

The settlement announced today resolves allegations that 3M violated the False Claims Act by selling or causing to be sold defective earplugs to the Defense Logistics Agency. Specifically, the United States alleged that 3M, and its predecessor, Aearo Technologies, Inc., knew the CAEv2 was too short for proper insertion into users’ ears and that the earplugs could loosen imperceptibly and therefore did not perform well for certain individuals. The United States further alleged that 3M did not disclose this design defect to the military.

The allegations resolved by the settlement were brought in a lawsuit filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act. The act permits private parties to sue on behalf of the government when they believe that defendants submitted false claims for government funds and to share in any recovery. As part of today’s resolution, the whistleblower will receive $1,911,000.

The settlement was the result of a coordinated effort by the Civil Division of the Department of Justice, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of South Carolina, the Army Criminal Investigation Command, and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

The case is captioned United States ex rel. Moldex-Metric v. 3M Company, Case No. 3:16-cv-1533-MBS (D.S.C.). The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

“Theft, waste, fraud and abuse of government funds and equipment is never acceptable,” said Minkler. “When it involves stealing from our military, it is a particularly egregious offense and those responsible will be held accountable.”

Treloar owned a St. Louis based company called Treloar Enterprises International, Inc. (TEI) which contracted with the Department of Defense’s Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to demilitarize military vehicles, mostly High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles commonly known as Humvees. The Humvee is a four-wheel drive military light truck capable of being outfitted with armor, ballistic glass and high-powered weapons and is currently being used in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters.

As part of Treloar’s contract with DLA, his company was responsible for demilitarizing the Humvees which would include eliminating the functional capabilities and inherent design features of vehicles. In many cases, that included the total destruction of the Humvee. When the Humvees were demilitarized, both Treloar and Collier verified in writing that the process had been completed.

From January 2014, through November 2015, TEI took delivery of all Humvees from Naval Support Activity Crane (Crane) which is located in Southern Indiana. To facilitate the contract, TEI opened a facility in nearby Spencer, Indiana, where the purported demilitarization took place. The indictment alleges Treloar converted at least seven fully armored Humvees for his own use and sold or attempted to sell them for his own benefit. The value of the Humvees was over $589,000. Both defendants also certified that each and every Humvee was demilitarized, when in fact they were not.

“Today’s indictments demonstrate the commitment of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and its law enforcement partners to protect the integrity of all Department of Defense programs,” said Special Agent in Charge John F. Khin, Southeast Field Office. “DCIS’ efforts in this investigation mitigated further significant loss and waste of taxpayer dollars from this fraudulent scheme.”

“Not only is fraud of this type a serious financial crime, the equipment involved is concerning,” said Mike Wiest, Special Agent in Charge of the NCIS Southeast Field Office. “There are no legitimate civilian uses for an armored military vehicle. NCIS will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to hold accountable those who siphon resources away from America’s warfighters.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Bradley P. Shepard who is prosecuting this case for the government, said Treloar faces up to 10 years’ imprisonment on each count of conversion of government property and Collier faces up to five years’ imprisonment on each count of false statements.

An indictment is only a charge and not evidence of guilt. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven otherwise in federal court.

In October 2017, U.S. Attorney Josh J. Minkler announced a Strategic Plan designed to shape and strengthen the District’s response to its most significant public safety challenges. This prosecution demonstrates the Office’s firm commitment to prosecuting complex, large-scale fraud schemes, particularly those that exploit positions of trust.

Inchcape Shipping Services Holdings Limited and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, Inchcape) have agreed to pay $20,000,000 to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by knowingly overbilling the U.S. Navy under contracts for ship husbanding services, the Department of Justice has announced.

Inchcape is a marine services contractor headquartered in the United Kingdom.

Inchcape provided goods and services to Navy ships at ports in several regions throughout the world, including southwest Asia, Africa, Panama, North America, South America and Mexico. Inchcape provided ships with food and other subsistence items, waste removal, telephone services, ship-to-shore transportation, force protection services and local transportation. The lawsuit alleged that from 2005 to 2014, Inchcape knowingly overbilled the Navy for these services by submitting invoices that overstated the quantity of goods and services provided, billing at rates in excess of applicable contract rates, and double-billing for some goods and services.

“Federal contractors may only charge the government for costs allowed by their federal contracts,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will take action against contractors that knowingly submit inflated claims to the armed forces—or any other agency of the United States—as those inflated claims wrongfully divert taxpayer dollars.”

“We trust contractors supporting our warfighters to act with the utmost integrity and expect them to comply with their obligations to bill the government as called for by their contracts,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jessie K. Liu. “This settlement reflects our Office’s strong commitment to holding accountable those who violate these fundamental principles, no matter where they may be located.”

“This settlement demonstrates that the Department of the Navy will continue to hold contractors accountable for the agreements they make to supply our fleet,” said Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer. “The Department expects strict adherence to higher standards within the Department and expects the same from its contractors.”

“Fraud is an abuse of the system that siphons resources away from the American warfighter,” said Jeremy Gauthier, Special Agent in Charge of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service’s Washington D.C. field office. “NCIS will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to hold responsible those who would put personal gain above corporate integrity.”

The lawsuit was brought under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act by three former employees of Inchcape, Noah Rudolph, Andrea Ford and Lawrence Cosgriff. Under the act, a private citizen may bring suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in any recovery. The government may intervene in the case, as it did here. The False Claims Act allows the government to recover treble damages and penalties from those who violate it. As part of today’s resolution, the whistleblowers will receive approximately $4.4 million.

The case was handled jointly by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of Columbia, with assistance from the Department of the Navy and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.

The case is captioned United States ex rel. Rudolph v. Inchcape Shipping Services Holdings Limited, et al., No. 1:10-cv-01109 (D.D.C). The claims alleged in the case are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

A New Jersey couple has been ordered to pay $232,891.37 to the United States for overcharging the military for light assemblies for munitions vehicles for the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).

The defendants, New Jersey residents Babu Metgud and Shubhada Kalyani, operated Shubhada Industries, a defense contractor. The United States, as the plaintiff, moved for summary judgment against Metgud and Kalyani. In granting the United States’ motion, the district court entered judgment against the individual defendants, awarding damages and imposing the maximum penalty allowable under the False Claims Act.

The case arose from a contract in which Shubhada Industries agreed to manufacture light assemblies for DLA. Instead of actually manufacturing those parts, Shubhada purchased them from a third party and charged the government a total purchase price of $73,842 — which amounted to a 5,400 percent mark-up of the cost price, according to the court’s opinion. When the government questioned the cost, Metgud justified it by explaining that costs sometimes seem very high “to untrained eyes.”

Under the False Claims Act, a person who causes false or fraudulent claims to be submitted to the government for payment is liable for three times the government’s damages, plus civil penalties for each false claim. The court’s judgment consists of three times the amount the DLA paid, plus a civil penalty of $11,000, which the court noted was “at the top of the statutory range.”

In imposing this maximum penalty, the court explained that Metgud and Kalyani did not disclose to the agency their purchase of the light assemblies from someone else. In addition, the court opined the individuals “have not been forthright or cooperative in the Government’s investigation of the claims alleged in the amended complaint,” and seemed to “shrug off” the investigation and the court proceeding.

“Those who do business with the government must treat taxpayers fairly,” said U.S. Attorney McSwain. “This case demonstrates my Office’s commitment to holding accountable defense contractors and others who try to game the system for personal profit at the military’s expense.”

The case is significant because the government, as the plaintiff and moving party at summary judgment, obtained a judgment on the merits and without a trial. It is also significant because the district court’s judgment was based in part on its conclusion that it could draw an adverse inference against the individual defendants who invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael S. Macko handled the case, which arose from an investigation led by the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

TrellisWare Technologies, Inc. has agreed to pay $12,177,631.90 to settle civil False Claims Act allegations that it was ineligible for multiple Small Business Innovation and Research (SBIR) contracts it entered into with the Defense Department.

TrellisWare is a majority-owned subsidiary of ViaSat, Inc., a global broadband services and technology company headquartered in San Diego.

The SBIR program is designed to stimulate technological innovation by funding small businesses to engage in federal research and development efforts. To be considered a small business for purposes of SBIR awards, a contractor must not be majority owned by another company.

Between 2008 and 2015, TrellisWare was awarded multiple SBIR contracts to provide the Navy, Army and Air Force with a variety of technology services and products involving communications and signal processing systems, including wireless networks used in military tactical environments. TrellisWare self-certified that it met the small business size requirements for eligibility to receive SBIR funding. But based on certain disclosures that TrellisWare later made about its ownership relationship with ViaSat, the government conducted an investigation into TrellisWare’s eligibility for SBIR awards. The government contends that TrellisWare was not eligible for SBIR awards because it was actually a majority-owned subsidiary of ViaSat at the time it was awarded and performed on SBIR contracts.

This matter was investigated by auditing personnel of the Affirmative Civil Enforcement Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, in coordination with Special Agents of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service; Naval Criminal Investigative Service; Army Criminal Investigation Command; Air Force Office of Special Investigations; and Small Business Administration, Office of the Inspector General.